MOD 15 - Various including tailings dam embankment upgrade

I object to the extended work hours into the evening (6pm - 10pm) for TSF Construction. Civil construction is very different to operational noise. These are plant that operate up to 120 dB. Operational noise can almost become a constant white noise. Civil construction has stop start aspects to hauling, tipping, pushing, compacting and reversing. Constant acceleration and deceleration noise. This provides an inconsistent distinction and why Construction activities are constrained to Daylight hours only under the original Cadia East Approval (06_0295) and clearly segregated under EPA Guidelines and State of NSW and Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW - Interim Construction Noise Guidelines.
As a community member within earshot of Cadia mine, I treasure our family evening time sitting on the veranda reflecting on the day. This proposed change will prevent this from happening going forward and this activity will need to be taken inside. This is a disruption the community should not have to tolerate. Why is it acceptable for an organisation to move the goal posts that impacts others more than themselves. Already relationships are strained of late with other challenges not related to noise. With the noise comes the fugitive light from the plant operating. I general glow to the south of the TSF area will luminate. Another change to the landscape that will come with this proposal.
An extract from the Cadia East Approval - Section 5.8 Visual - Mining Operations - The key aspects of the project that have the potential to impact on the mine’s visibility to sensitive receivers include the raising of the tailing's storage facilities (northern facility to be raised by 38 m and southern facility to be raised by 20 m), the subsidence zone and light emissions during nighttime operations.
It has already been acknowledged that light emissions at night are sensitive. Let alone Tailings in general.
By permitting the extended work hours introduces many other factors: It will require split shifts to cover the 16hr days which increase traffic on the roads. The ongoing requirement to constantly monitor noise and activities are adhering to methods to minimise noise. The question of suitable noise suppression and debates over noise thresholds/exceedances and the knock-on effects to the community. This change is opening a floodgate to long term construction noise as tailings activities proceed for life of mine. Mitigation discussion and even acquisition thoughts can be prevented by not allowing this evening work to proceed. Or is this a bigger strategy to expand the mine footprint under commercially controlled mechanisms. You have to wonder.
Ultimately the Community are the only losers in this situation due to the mine not managing their schedules and need to make up time. Surely with Newmont acquiring Cadia, they have the ability to recognise how important community relations are going forward to weather the schedule impact of having to operate in the evenings. Their website preaches this. Maybe this will be a test of character as they forge their own relationship with the Community. Cadia isn't Newcrest's cash cow anymore and merely one of ten tier one Newmont assets.
This is a reactive proposal to combat schedule slippage that only risks further damage to Community relationships. The submission already notes two exceedances under their noise study. This is just the start of these exceedance discussions that should not have to exist. Why in the past 13 years has this site been able to comply with construction working hours until now. What has changed and how did it get to this position?
Government needs to honour their position from their 2010 approval and not dilute their stance on construction hours that would directly impact the environment to the surrounding neighbours. If they do, it contradicts compliance under their own guidelines.

I object to Modification 15 (Mod 15), submitted by Cadia Valley Operations (CVO).
I also object to the timing of this submission. This submission was lodged by CVO on 24 November 2023, with submissions due by the 14 December. The timing of this submission conflicts with the busy Christmas season, which does not allow ample time for the review of such a lengthy and complicated document. If the purpose of public consultation is to allow the community to submit their opinions, why limit us by putting this modification out for exhibition for such a short time at the busiest time of year? I propose that CVO's submissions are not exhibited at this time of year again, and longer exhibition time periods to allow the public to better comment.
Given that CVO has pleaded guilty to three of the five air pollution charges from the EPA, I object to CVO being allowed to proceed with Mod 15. Given that CVO have not completed all conditions from Mod 14 (over 11 reports are incomplete), it is not acceptable that they are being allowed to lodge yet another modification.
Mod 15 will result in more noise impacts to residents living near the mine. People live in a rural area for its peace and quiet, and this modification will further impact their ability to enjoy a quiet rural lifestyles. For example, the proposed changes to the tailings dams (NTSF and STSF) and the construction of a trial tailings embankment, along with the change to working hours for TSF construction into the evening, will result in increased noise to nearby residents. In addition, the realignment of Panuara Road will likely result in further noise and disruption to the local community, with increased traffic, heavy vehicle route changes and further deterioration on local roads.

I understand the benefits to the local district of Orange and the wider community that the continued construction and modification of the Mine has, however, the Mine has had a detrimental effect on the physical and social structure of the local Panuara community in which we live. Some problems have not been resolved in 25years.

Noise
We are concerned regards ongoing 24hour noise production with further mine modification and expansion. It is in the evening time when the mill and truck movements are more noticeable at our house which is in direct line with the Mine operation. Reversing trucks, especially after rain is not compatible with family sleep cycles.

Light
The ongoing “visual impact” affects the marketability of our property. Many Mine photos have been taken from our property over the years. Originally it was a 21year Mine but that was misleading. The bright Mine lights at night gives the appearance of a town.

Dust
Dust production has always been an ongoing problem regardless of the Mine`s determination to supress tailings dust to no avail. The result of this phenomena is contaminated water on farms. Credit to the Mine for supplying bottled water to farms for drinking water but even with routine cleaning of water tanks, increased lead and copper levels have resulted from ongoing mining.

Water
We are concerned about the ongoing water harvesting effects on local springs and the decline of the major water courses in the Panuara area. Those water courses include Swallow creek, Cobblers creek, Cadia /Angullong creek, Rodds creek and Flyers creek. I am concerned about failed tailings dams and the consequences to the local environment and water catchment area. I am also concerned about the diminishing water levels in our bore that was built to support livestock during drought times.

Roads
The realignment of the Panuara road is a huge inconvenience and increased costs to travelling to Carcoar sale yards, work or sporting events in Blayney and Cowra. That inconvenience is further exacerbated by the time it will take to complete the project and requiring travel via who knows where?

Safety
Increased traffic from construction workers/miners etc puts Panuara residents/workers increases the risk of accidents on narrow rural roads, especially through the forest and four mile creek roads.
Increased construction will again increase kangaroo movements onto roads.

Weeds
Increased land for mining activity leads to increased risk of spreading weeds onto local agricultural land at an increased cost to farmers.

Mental health
The negative social impact on the Panuara community continues as family properties are acquired by the Mine. The community tries to keep socially active but the diminishing membership has lead to poor morale and a feeling of hopelessness.

Land Values
The presence of the Mine has led to an uncertainty in land value and the ability to realise our asset values when we do wish to sell.
My proposed plan to secure the value of our asset is:
1. Put the Hamilton property on the market at its value without the influence of the Mine. This is to be determined by an independent valuer.
2. If the property can not be sold in a pre-determined time period then The Mine purchases the property at the independent value and they can sell it.
This proposal would give the Hamilton family some security and prove that what the Mine says is correct – that the Mine has no effect on agricultural property values.

Yours sincerely,
Vivianna Hamilton

It causes both myself and the community great concern that this Modification submission falls around the busiest time of year for families. Considering the magnitude of the document and the information presented for the lay person to digest and lodge a submission, it is a very unreasonable expectation.
Given that the mine project shows a lack of competency to operate – displayed by the numerous fines and guilty pleas to criminal charges in the Land and Environment Court and additional investigations occurring by the Compliance Department within the DPE, it astounds me that project even has the tenacity to even apply for further Mod’s. CVO have not even completed all the conditions on Mod 14 with what I believe to be over 10 outstanding reports to date.

The proposed use of Hydro-Cycloned sand for the next EIS & CCOP project raises many questions for the community. As stated in the Global Mining Review Article dated 29th December 2022 when referring to the use of such technology in earthquake prone South America the ‘TSF dam walls need to be stable and reliable in the event of an earthquake. It is not uncommon for operators to utilise tailings in the construction of the dam wall; however, the sand needs to be of a certain consistency and quality to ensure the TSF’s integrity. The plant tailings are hydro-cycloned, producing a relatively coarse free draining sand that can be used to build the dam wall’. How can the Governing authorities GUARANTEE the community that CVO will source the correct sand consistency to guarantee the TSF’s integrity? CVO has NOT proven to the community that they are trustworthy neighbors to date.

It is requested that prior to approving such Modification CVO is required to complete all prior Modifications and reporting, and an independent regulatory department conduct a Spatial distribution model.

These are just a few of many concerns we have living in the community but given the actual timing and the timeframe of the submission to submit a meaningful document I will continue with dot points.
• Information on rehabilitation plan of the tailings facilities.
• Realignment of the Panuara Road, more details needed.
• Visual improvement of the VR14 collapsed vent shaft on the Cadia Road
• Positions of air monitoring on the eastern side, the accuracy of the readings is truly questionable.

The main reason for the objection of this project is the fact there is an unfinished previous Mod, there are criminal charges in the Land and Environment Court, Guilty Pleas after all the community has heard at meetings is that they are doing the right thing - when if fact they are not and they admit it to the authorities!

How can Governing authorities guarantee that CVO won't be affecting the neighboring landholders beyond the life of the mine? Have the Health authorities ever done a deep dive investigation (mapping) of the area and the incidents of cancer diagnosis and sadly fatality of those who have resided around the mine area?

I wish to object to this MOD 15 on the grounds that_;
Not all conditions of MOD 14 have been adhered to
Time frame for reading and preparing a submission is almost impossible, Christmas and length of document (1500+ pages)
CVO continuing unreliable reporting and a safety plan for the reopening of Ridgeway underground mine.

see attached letter dated 11 December 2023

I object to the project on the grounds in my report. CVO, unfortunately, can no longer be trusted to operate within the guidelines given to them, and have not completed all MOD 14 requirements. MOD 15 needs to be VERY carefully looked at, especially in relation to the health and welfare of the community and the environment.

I have written an objection to some parts of the MOD 15 and I support the more detailed submission of the CCSN.
CVO has totally lost the trust of this community with their misinformation and blatent lies to the residents.

Being former Landholder of the country including Ridgeway mine ..I have made comment to CVO about their intention to rework Ridgeway underground operations.
Now the Ridgeqay cave zone currently occupies what was a recharge area for a localised spring which provided water for stock and domestic operations on property Tunbridge wells. That went with the cave zone development stages 1, 2, 3 .
With the proposed reworking of Ridgeway underground ..I have identified with CVO that the land to the west of cave zone is the recharge area for the spring that starts swallow Creek.. if this area ,to west of existing cave zone expands into recharge area of swallow Creek, the potential loss of that spring will put the adjoining grazing land in jepody of permanent water that the top end of swallow Creek serves .
When original monitoring bores were installed they showed the reliability of that aquifer that feeds swallow Creek.
CVO has verbally assured that that impact will not occur ..yet on the Mod 15 map of proposed cave zone expansion , the incursion into the recharge zone of swallow Creek spring aquifer is plainly obvious .
If that spring is lost alternate provisions for water in the head area of swallow Creek will need to be provided .
With a drought forecast for 2025 early provision of supplementary water supply for the described area , would need to be considered before reworking of Ridgeway underground commences .
This spring impacts about 1500 acreas of grazing country that supports both sheep and cattle and horse operations .
Careful consideration of impact must be considered and a remedial strategy put in place should that reliable spring fail due to Ridgeway underground cave zone breeching that recharge area .
I thank you for opportunity to make comment as the only person with extensive historical knowledge of that spring and riverine system still with that knowledge base and being a representative of landholders on the CCC which CVO reports too.
Regards Graham R Brown